What is informal writing?

Informal writing is a term that has largely been taken for granted. Although the term is sometimes found in the professional literature, the formal‐informal distinction in writing has been a rather – ahem – informal one; they are not well‐thought‐out categories with clear definitions (Friginal and Weigle 2014). Furthermore, they tend to focus on the textual features and functions of what is considered to be informal genres. As Biber (1988) pointed out, however, the general distinction between formal and informal writing does not capture the complexity of textual features and functions, suggesting that variations in textual features are better captured through a multidimensional analysis (see also Grieve et al. 2010).

When it comes to textual features and functions, we agree. Yet, informal writing is not just about textual features or functions. Although there are genre features and functions that are associated with informal writing, informality in writing is usually dictated by particular situations and the relationships that surround the use of writing (Hyland and Jiang 2017). In this chapter, we define informal writing as writing practices that take place in relatively low‐stakes situations (i.e. readers do not exert a great deal of power over the writer), thus providing greater opportunities for the negotiation of forms, functions, and relationships as well as the development of language and literacy. The difference between formal and informal writing is not a clear‐cut binary; rather they exist along a continuum of the degree to which the writer's choices in writing are constrained by external forces.

Informal writing is not just a particular set of genres, although there are genres that tend to be associated with informal writing situations and have features that are considered informal (e.g. colloquial expressions and less conventionalized organizational structures). The rhetorical situation and genre features are often interrelated – after all, genres arise in response to recurring rhetorical situations (Bakhtin 1986; Miller 1984), and particular situations, purposes, roles, and relationships are invoked by the use of recognizable genres. Genres that are considered formal tend to take place in a hierarchical relationship between the writer and the reader, and their features tend to be more stable and predictable. Informal genres, on the other hand, are less constrained by rigid conventions or expectations because they tend to be used in contexts in which the reader plays a less evaluative role.

To say that informal genres are less rigid does not mean they have no predictable patterns. Like various forms of spoken language that are used in informal settings, writing that takes place in informal settings also does have its own structural integrity. As Houghton et al. (2018) argued in the context of digital communication:

…the divergence from formal written English that is found in digital communication is neither arbitrary nor sloppy. It is principled and effective in allowing texters to communicate subtle interpersonal information. The rapidly changing language of texting and the evolution of “written speech” is a testament to human creativity and linguistic flexibility.

(p. 116)

It is also important to note that the formality or informality of the writer–reader relationship and genre features do not always coincide. Informal genres can be used in a hierarchical relationship (e.g. sharing a reflective or exploratory writing with a supervisor) and formal genres can be found in an informal relationship (e.g. wedding invitations sent out to friends). One of the most obvious examples of informal genres in a formal setting is the classroom use of social media writing. Although the genre features are generally “conversational and informal in tone,” the classroom context makes the writing situation formal if students are required to participate and are subjected to “formal assessment procedures” (Alm 2015, p. 4; see also Meskill et al. 2012).

The distinction between formal and informal writing is thus a dynamic set of continua along structural and situational axes. The formality of writing can shift when the text moves from an informal relationship to a formal relationship. Writing process genres such as freewriting and first drafts can be informal in the sense that they are created and used to serve writer's own purpose in facilitating the development of ideas and texts. While it is possible for some writers to produce formal texts from the beginning, it is still not subject to evaluation until the writer decides to turn on the critical eyes (which is an internalization of the assessment by the audience) or when it is presented to another person – e.g. peers, teachers, editors, or supervisors – who would then evaluate the piece for its structural or functional characteristics.

The nature of the writer–reader relationship can also shift. In an exchange between an uncle and a niece, for example, the uncle might, depending on the situation, play the role of a guardian or authoritarian figure, a sympathetic and supportive mentor, or even a friend. A relationship with a greater power differential would result in a more evaluative role, thus making the writing between the two more formal. The act of reading tends to be more evaluative when the readers have social or institutional power over the writer.

In informal relationships, writers and readers are more or less on equal footing so the power differential has less of an impact on the writer's decisions. Some informal genres such as diaries are generally written for the writer's personal purposes and are not subject to anyone else's assessment. The writers may keep them private for fear of judgment or misunderstanding. Informal writing can be shared with others and, when it happens, writers generally expect affirmative responses (e.g. agreement, sympathy, etc.) rather than critical responses (e.g. judgment, evaluation).

Critical responses to informal writing can and do happen, although they may be less expected or appreciated than they are in the case of formal writing. An obvious example is an innocuous social media posting that is attacked by internet trolls. When conflicts arise, writers in informal relationships tend to have more freedom to withdraw from it by ignoring or deleting the comments, or by blocking the critic. In formal writing situations, such as students submitting an essay for grading in a writing classroom or a politician making public statements that can be scrutinized by the media, writers cannot escape the consequences so easily.

Why informal writing?

Understanding and teaching informal writing is important in and of itself. First and foremost, studying informal writing is important from a descriptive perspective because informal writing happens. To ignore informal writing is to limit the understanding of writing to a narrow range of situations, purposes, and genres. L2 learners and users do engage in informal writing in personal as well as professional and academic contexts.

Some L2 users need informal writing more than formal writing in their lives – in fact, the vast majority of college‐level L2 learners will go into non‐academic professions where formal academic writing is seldom seen. Some of the possible needs include writing a note to a roommate, leaving a sign on the door, writing thank‐you notes, writing messages in high school yearbooks, and posting a restaurant review on social media. Many L2 writers keep diaries or journals, or write comments on social media while others engage in online interactions through gaming or fan fiction sites (Lam 2000; Reinhardt 2013; Yi 2007). In professional contexts, workers take messages during phone calls, write instructions on sticky notes, create temporary signs, and send quick email messages to colleagues.

Even those who stay in academic contexts will find themselves in situations where writing informally – or at least incorporating features that are often found in informal writing – is necessary. In a study of academic texts in four disciplines, Hyland and Jiang (2017) found that academic writing is becoming more informal in some fields. They examined a 2.2‐million‐word corpus of articles published in three different time periods in leading journals in four disciplines in terms of the uses of features that are generally regarded as informal – such as first‐person pronouns, unattended anaphoric pronouns, direct questions, exclamations, and sentence final proposition. The study showed that articles in science and engineering fields incorporated more informal features over time, although the reverse was true in social sciences.

Researchers of learning outside the formal classroom context have pointed out that a majority of workplace learning is informal learning (Eraut 2004) through various forms and levels of participation involving observations and interactions, not resembling the structured and facilitated learning experience in the classroom in terms of the process of learning and its outcomes (Dias et al. 1999; Gee 2005). In professional contexts, a wide variety of informal writing take place daily, such as taking notes during phone conversations and leaving messages on sticky notes. These are functional genres, the value of which is measured not so much for what they look like (form) but what they do (function), although some level of predictability in form helps readers recognize the functions.

Understanding students' informal writing experience outside the classroom context can also contribute to classroom instruction because students' previous experience can influence how they interact with the classroom materials and activities. Students are not tabula rasa (blank slates); rather, they bring varying degrees of knowledge and awareness of language and literacy from their engagement with informal as well as formal writing. In a qualitative case study of a Korean high school student, Yi (2009) documented how the student's voluntary, out‐of‐class literacy activities (diary, to‐do lists calendar/planner writing, emails, online chats, notes, and scribbling) and school writing activities in a creative writing class (free writing, journal entries, short stories, narratives, poems) influenced each other in terms of topic, genres, and language features.

Informal writing can also serve various functions in the classroom. It can be used as writing process genres – such as free writing, clustering, outlines, idea notes, and reflections – that can contribute to the production of more formal genres both spoken and written. An increased recognition of informal writing may also help counter the traditional assumptions that writing is necessary only for students who are going to pursue an academic career or that writing always has to be conventional and grammatically accurate – assumptions that are making the goal of learning to write unnecessarily intimidating and unrealistic both for teachers and students. Various forms of informal writing – such as mind‐mapping, journal writing, reflective writing, grammar logs, and portfolio cover letters – can also facilitate the development of metalinguistic and metarhetorical awareness (Witte 2017).

Engaging in informal writing can also help students develop their sense of identity – not only in terms of identity constructed through written discourse (Matsuda 2015) but also in terms of shaping the sense of identity as language learners and users. Lam (2000) has shown how a Chinese immigrant teenager's online communication with a transnational group of peers helped her develop a sense of identity as an English user. The evolving sense of identity – or the “ideal self” (Dörnyei 2009) can have important implications for the motivation of students.

Informal writing also has the potential of facilitating the development of language and writing (Manchón 2011). Toffoli and Sockett (2015), for instance, report that students in France “spend more time learning English informally than they do in the classroom,” resulting in “unexpected changes in language skills and repertoires” (p. 1). Many language educators used Facebook not only as a preparation of future language use on Facebook (Prichard 2013; Reinhardt 2013) but also as a way of facilitating informal language development (Blattner and Fiori 2009; Blattner and Lomicka 2012; Mills 2011; Promnitz‐Hayashi 2011). Although informal writing situations can facilitate learning, focusing too much on learning can be counterproductive. One of the most important aspects of learning in informal writing situations is that learning is not the main goal. In fact, the value of informal writing situations is that the focus is not on learning to write (development) or writing well (performance) but on engaging with ideas and people (participation), providing opportunities for situated learning through legitimate peripheral participation (Lave and Wenger 1991).

Some of these sites of informal writing are particularly engaging because of the intense, socially shared interest in the subject. Gee (2005) uses the term affinity space (p. 223) to characterize spaces where participants develop and engage in elaborate and highly complex language activities – and do so voluntarily and with pleasure! The voluntary and pleasurable nature of informal writing may have important implications for the development of language and literacy. In the context of reading, researchers have documented the value of voluntary pleasure reading for language and literacy development (Krashen 1988; Lee et al. 1996; Stokes et al. 1998; Constantino et al. 1997; Lee 2001); in writing, free‐voluntary writing can also play a vital role in facilitating writing development by motivating students to engage in the kind of frequent writing practice that does not happen easily in formal educational contexts, where students often dread writing.

Because informal writing is less evaluative than formal writing, it can contribute to the development of language and literacy in ways formal writing may not be able to. Non‐evaluative writing activities can create a safe space for writers to explore and develop ideas as well as genre knowledge and awareness. Incorporating informal writing can also help facilitate the process of writing by lowering inhibition and encouraging exploration of ideas and forms. Elbow (1987) has argued the importance of closing one's eyes as one speaks – or of temporarily ignoring the audience in the process of developing the ideas and drafts. Elbow (1973) is also known for his earlier argument for playing the “believing game,” in which writers and readers look for strengths and potential before playing the “doubting game,” which focuses on weaknesses and areas that need to be improved.

Teaching informal writing

Because informal writing is less rigid in form, it may be easy to assume that it does not need to be taught. Quite the contrary, the ability to write in informal situations does not necessarily come naturally, especially to L2 writers, and formal instruction can help students develop the knowledge, skills, awareness, and strategies necessary to respond to informal writing situations effectively and productively. Even something that may seem simple and low‐stakes such as free writing takes some practice before students can develop enough fluency to use it productively in generating texts and exploring ideas. Some experienced writers of formal genres find informal writing tasks such as writing birthday cards or messages of condolence challenging not just because of the unfamiliarity with the genre but also because of the pressure to say something unique and genuine while avoiding being inappropriate.

In some cases, writing in informal genres can be more challenging than using highly conventionalized and well‐described formal genres because the lack of rigid structure means writers have to negotiate the form based on meaning, functions, and social relationships. In an informal relationship, sociolinguistically appropriate writing involves the proper use of colloquial expressions and idiomatic phrases as well as abbreviations, punctuation marks, emoticons, and other conventions in order to construct a discursive identity that matches the occasion. In texting, for example, the use of periods at the end of a message can create a distance between the writer and the reader by suggesting insincerity (Gunraj et al. 2016) or abruptness (Houghton et al. 2018). Using these features appropriately is especially challenging for language learners who learned the language through formal instruction that tends to privilege formal genres and situations.

In the teaching of informal writing, the three most important considerations are: fluency, functionality, and fun. Because of its low‐stakes nature, informal writing can be used as a way of developing fluency. Instead of focusing on writing well (in the structural sense), teachers can encourage students to focus on becoming comfortable with the act of writing. It can be facilitated with frequent or regular writing activities that are easy enough for students to continue writing on a regular basis, such as journal writing entries, diaries, and social media postings. The emphasis should be on getting into the habit of writing or producing more texts. The fluency developed through frequent and informal writing activities can contribute to formal writing as well. The ability to produce texts effortlessly can help overcome writer's block and facilitate the drafting process. It can also help make revisions less daunting.

Informal writing is also useful in developing functionality, or the ability to use writing to reflect, remember, organize, inform, persuade, and so on. By putting less emphasis on form, students can focus on getting things done with writing by using any available means. Instead of starting with particular forms of writing, writing activities can be designed around a particular function that needs to be performed – such as requesting students who use the same classroom in the previous period to tidy up the room before leaving – and having students come up with clever ways of accomplishing the task by using writing.

Informal writing can also make writing fun – yes, fun. Writing is often considered to be a challenging language activity, one that is often dreaded by students and teachers alike. The negative experience with writing instruction is associated with high expectations for the quality and amount of written production – when it comes to writing, teachers tend to expect too much too soon. By putting less emphasis on rules and conventions, students can use writing to explore ideas, create solutions, and communicate for pleasure, not out of a sense of obligation.

Teaching informal writing and teaching formal writing are not mutually exclusive. Informal writing does not replace formal writing but it can help enhance the overall development of language and literacy by creating opportunities to experiment with forms and functions in ways that are not possible with formal writing. It does not have to take up much of the class time, either. It can be a warm up activity at the beginning of the language or writing course, a short activity at the beginning of the class, or a quick reflection at the end of the learning process. Informal writing can also be used in tandem with oral communication activities, which helps students prepare for or reflect on those activities in ways that are more visible both to the student and the teacher. Informality can also be incorporated into formal writing assignments in various ways – i.e. brainstorming at the beginning of the process, recording possible ideas, reflecting on successes and struggles, and communicating feedback. Chances are, teachers who teach formal writing already use informal writing in some of these ways.

One of the advantages of informal writing is its ubiquity – students are surrounded by informal writing. Simply raising the awareness of how many reading and writing activities people participate in can make writing less intimidating. Informal writing can also be offered as an optional assignment. Instead of making it a requirement, the teacher might tell students about the importance of frequent writing in language and writing development, show some examples of easy writing activities such as journal writing, blogging, social media writing, and encourage them to engage in these activities in various ways – not for grades or rewards but for fun. This is the equivalent of doctors helping patients to understand the importance of eating well and exercising regularly, which can enhance the general health and physical fitness prerequisite to training for more advanced or specialized physical activities.

Assessing informal writing

The assessment of informal writing in the classroom context is somewhat paradoxical because the very act of assessment – and the power hierarchy inherent in it – makes the situation formal (Alm 2015; Meskill et al. 2012). In order to mediate the power relations, it is important to simulate a writing situation that involves readers other than the teacher‐evaluator. For example, instead of just telling students to write a paragraph introducing themselves, tell students to imagine that an exchange student is coming to your school, and she is nervous about coming into a new school without any friends. Then ask them to write a paragraph introducing themselves to her. The assessment can be based on how the message would help the exchange student feel more comfortable by knowing that there are friendly people who are interested in getting to know her. By setting up a realistic writing context, the teacher's role can then shift from that of the evaluative reader to that of a sympathetic coach, whose goal is to help students perform better for the intended purposes by providing encouragement and resources as needed (Leki 1990).

Traditional writing assessment tends to focus on the quality of written text itself, but it does not have to be that way, especially when it comes to teaching informal writing. Because of the openness of conventions and the relative lack of power differential between writers and readers, the assessment of informal writing needs to put a greater emphasis on the process, learning, and functions. What matters in the assessment of informal writing is whether or not the learners achieve the goals. In developing criteria for assessing informal writing in a language or writing classroom, it is important to take into account its characteristics (lack of a rigid structure, meeting particular audience expectations, etc.) and functions. Informal writing should not be assessed based primarily on conventional features or audience expectations; instead, it should focus more on content and function in the particular context; in other words, the focus should be on what the text does rather than on how it does it.

Outside the text itself, there are many factors that can and need to be taken into account in assessing student work. The grades can also be based on whether students complete the assignment in a timely manner; whether students try to make it work better by revising extensively; whether students provided useful peer feedback; whether students consider the situation, purpose, and audience thoughtfully; whether they try new strategies for developing fluency, accuracy, and complexity; how students engage in analyzing and applying the genre features; and so on. That is, the emphasis can be on doing rather than the outcome of what has been done. The key is to assess, acknowledge, and reward positive behavior that leads to the development of language and literacy.

Of course, it is possible and sometimes necessary to assess students' informal writing for the quality of writing and language use, but in making decisions about when and how to assess informal writing, it is important to keep in mind the purpose of teaching informal writing. If the purpose is to develop fluency, assessment should be based on the frequency or amount of writing activities (i.e. how often or how much time spent writing) rather than the quality of writing; feedback should be primarily positive and encouraging, and it can be about idea development or the amount of text written.

If the purpose is to teach functions, the assessment can be based on whether and to what extent the specific function is achieved, focusing on the overall effectiveness rather than the well‐formedness of the text; feedback should be based on the effect of the text on the intended readers. If the goal is to teach the genre features or conventions of specific informal writing genres, it is appropriate to assess the uses of textual features for the situation. Yet, instead of expecting perfection in all aspects of writing, it would be useful to consider the use of what is known as the primary trait rubric, which targets only a few salient features of the particular type of writing. It would allow students to focus on developing particular skills or functions without overwhelming performance anxiety. Another principle that is particularly useful for assessing informal writing is to make assessment frequent and low‐stakes, which can create more opportunities for feedback and learning, shifting the emphasis from summative feedback to formative feedback (Warnock 2012).

These classroom assessment strategies can be adopted in assessing formal writing as well, but they are especially important for informal writing. Making appropriate and effective decisions about classroom writing assessment is not a matter of adopting a generic rubric and applying it faithfully. Instead, it requires teachers to consider the instructional purposes, what can reasonably be taught and learned, and what specific outcomes are desired that match the instructional purposes and the actual instruction (Matsuda 2012). Such complex decision‐making requires each teacher to develop assessment literacy. As Crusan and Matsuda (2018) point out, “grades are a flawed creation – they are imprecise indications of student performance and learning and, if not designed carefully, can privilege performance at the expense of learning” (p. 1; see Crusan 2010 and Crusan and Matsuda 2018 for more discussion of classroom L2 writing assessment).